Peers reject tariff for victims of crime
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.(First Edition)
CONTROVERSIAL plans to reduce compensation for many victims of crime were defeated in the House of Lords yesterday.
Peers approved an amendment by the former Law Lord, Lord Ackner, to reverse the drastic restructuring of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. Under the old scheme compensation was based on an individual assessment of need and loss. But in April a tariff-based system, with flat sums for each offence was introduced. The new system has substantially reduced payouts to victims of violent crime, who are no longer compensated for earnings lost as a result of their injuries.
Lord Ackner said: 'The new system ignores a fundamental test of justice and fairness the principle that compensation should be paid according to need.'
Earl Ferrers, for the Government, argued that the old system's emphasis on individual assessment made it slow, cumbersome and uncertain. He said the new scheme would remain the most generous in the world, with most victims getting as much compensation as before and more quickly.
But, accusing the Government of 'sheer hypocrisy,' Lord Ackner said: 'The real purpose of this move is to cut costs.'
Reacting to the Lords' defeat, a Home Office spokesman said last night that the Government would be inviting the Commons to reverse the amendment.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments